Ok guys - Boardseeker mag seem to be trying to set themselves up as a new pan european testing authority on windsurfing gear - and so far seem to have been pretty balanced about it.

But what a weird test for the Q-76 the french, germans and even the printed UK magazines loved it .I heard that one of the UK magazine testers bought a Q-76 for himself after doing the test.

I'm wondering whether they have been "bought" by Quatro - all they seem to do is bang on about the Quatro twins and quads and at the first opportunity they had to really have a go at SB they fully piled in there.

The UK distributor puts lots of advertising the way of boardseeker and their boss even had a quatro shaped for him a few years back.

Kinda makes you think they are not at all impartial.

As a UK customer who has bought (and loves) the Q76 convertible i'm really upset and angry about this as it'll no doubt impact severley on my boards resale value- plus all the "trendy" kids will think i'm a muppet.

Never forget that boards are lot about personal opinion. If you love yours, no need to be upset with this particular test result. I have a Q76 myself that works perfectly for me, including when squishing out tight bottom turns in small waves. In fact this is for me one area where it excels the most. And if you read the test, they like it a lot for everything else and the test also "proves" the convertible option is far from a safety afterthought.

Personally, I think that there is a very special type of bottom turn technique that can provoke an unpredictable behavior with the Quads - a combination of more power than most would put in and at the same time a back footed approach. I'm willing to claim that very few sailors will be able to provoke that behavior. And if the particular board has some fin alignment problems or something this may get a more pronounced problem. The fact that they thought the 15/12 fin combo didn't work well for straight line sailing for me indicated that there is fact may be something fishy going on. For me that combo is still like a train upwind (and that hold even for the smaller 13/11 combo which I use a lot).

So I don't think there is a reason to discredit the test or the test crew. These particular sailors probably just happen to tango well with the special feel that is inherent in all quatro boards. Other test teams may have other preferences (and like you say, all others have loved the Quad 76 - I know that testers also from other mags have chosen the Starboard Quad 76 as their personal board). It is almost impossible to be perfectly neutral and don't let your own style and preferences influence your opinions on a board.

And regarding the "trendy kids", I suggest to just show them on the water that your board rips.

As Ola said it's impossible to be 100% neutral, but the problem is clearly elsewhere when you read the test. Sorry for having this opinion and I know this may start an argument with some Boardseekers readers, but after reading the test thoroughly I found it completely ridiculous. They already had a problem with the Evil Twin last year. Being an owner of one and knowing my board well I just didn't understand why they faulted the board in the categories they did, since by my experience I had quite an opposite feeling. I remember they called the board "unpredictable in turns", which is wrong to me. But fair enough, maybe they're just so much better than me and can feel things I can't , I told myself then. There are quite a few things I can say to criticize the ET, but being unpredictable is not one of them.

Anyway, I am now the proud owner of a StarQuad, and it's by far one of the very best waveboards I have ever owned for wavesailing. And I have had MANY. So when I read that the 76 used with the fin set of the 81 doesn't turn well in the bottom turn with the quad option, but is better when you switch to the single fin, I think something is really weird. When I read further down that switching to the original fin set of the 76, the board now spinouts on a straight line, I realize that I am reading some heavy bullshit. For real. If you haven't tried a Starquad yet do yourself a favor, try one, and see why this sounds so wrong in every possible way.
The graphics on their page is good, the layout well made, with great photographs, and the sailors on the pics surely know how to sail. But as of the content of the test... it's probably the worse test I have read about a board I own and know. I have owned some boards who got or didn't get good test in the past, and sometimes agreed with them, sometime disagreed. But this spinout in a straight line Quad board test is definitely the biggest lie/nonsense I have ever read in a waveboard test , like ever.

BUT they mention there is still the possibility of a faulty board from the factory, with misaligned fin boxes.
Right. It surely doesn't seem that way on the pics at all, but who knows ?

Thanks for standing up for the product, Anowan. I agree that anybody in doubt should try one of the Quads and see for themselves. As I wrote above, I think very, very few will find a problem with the bottom turn.

I agree with Viking. I can well imagine that small manufacturing errors for example in the toe in with twin and quad boards can have great effect on performance. What if the quality control at Cobra isn't good enough? Then there will be a lot of windsurfers that are stuck with a board that does not work as intended, and I am sure it will be difficult to get these kinds of boards replaced...

I think it is good that the boardseeker crew write what they find, and not just give Starboard a rave revue because it is big manufacturer, a big advertiser, and because other testers have written a good revue.

I think this is about honesty, and I am very surprised that some of the contributors to this thread demand that boardseeker make a particular board a testwinner regardless of the test team's findings.

Isn't that exactly what has happened to the tests in Boards and Windsurf? Luckily there is still Surf Magazine for those that read german :-)

In reading the Boardseeker review, I too was a bit perplexed by their conclusions. But when I compare it to my experiences (in my case a Quad 86), perhaps there's another possible explanation.

My first experiences on the Quad 86 were lackluster. I was thinking there would just be an adjustment period to board's natural style and I was mentally prepared to let things slide until I found its secrets. But in fact my particular problem centered on the security of the rear fins. On my board the set screws are not really true set screws as they have a slight head to them which prevented their full engagement with the FCS fins. The results was a less than stellar fin security. This absolutely makes the board squirrely. I can appreciate it if Boardseeker simply did not have those rear fins tied down tightly, because I knew the moment when the rear fins got loose, the board just stopped performing.

I have subsequently modfied the set screw arrangement to secure the FCS fins rigid. What a HUGE difference it has made. My last session with the board truely revealed it promised manuevering potential and, in particular, surprised me with its rather impressive straight-line speed.

So I surmise that perhaps the board is fine, but that the fin arragement is simply not rigid enough for the Boadseeker reviewers to unleash the boards potential.

I agree with Chesapeake. I am fairly heavy at 85-90kg so have the Quad 81, have had it six months. Its a fantastic product from Starboard taken the Evo concept forward.

BUT I did not really like it for the first five or so sessions, it felt weird and a bit draggy in a straight line (and loves to point upwind!). Another sailor on the beach bought the 86 Quad and traded it after the first session (wealthy guy...!!).

I also found the outer fins were loose after the second session (very very loose). Tightened them - so much better, then they loosened again. I ended up putting some sailcloth in to tighten the box fitting and have never touched them since.

Its a fantastic board but as in any experimental design it is going to need to be tested over time not over one test session.

I can not recommend it highly enough for any dedicated amateur wave sailors, just stick with it, make some adjustments, and you will be rewarded.